Monthly Archives: January 2019

THERMONUCLEAR SUBSTANTIAL ERROR: In 1978 Joseph Ratzinger considered hypothesis that a monarchical Papacy was intrinsically “Arian” in nature, and the Papacy should reflect the Trinity, a “Pope-Troika” consisting of One Catholic, One Protestant and One Orthodox, “through which the papacy, the chief annoyance of non-Catholic Christendom, must become the definitive vehicle for the unity of all Christians.”

St. Vincent Ferrer came through.  Quickly.  Less than 24 hours after my post enjoining his prayers went up, this stupefying citation with translation landed in my email box from the German readership.

Here is the trail of breadcrumbs:

-I posted a screen cap and citation from the opening of Chapter 8 of J. Michael Miller’s doctoral thesis citing Walter Kasper.  The quote was, “The present crisis of the papacy is one of legitimation.”  

-This quote of Kasper’s was drawn from a work called “Dienst an der Einheit”, page 83.

-“Dienst an der Einheit”, which means, “Service to Unity”, is a collection of papers edited by…wait for it… JOSEPH RATZINGER.  So Kasper’s quote was EDITED BY RATZINGER.

One of the contributuions to “Dienst an der Einheit” is a paper written by Joseph Ratzinger himself, titled “Der Primat des Papstes und die Einheit des Gottesvolkes” which is in English, “The Primacy of the Pope and the Unity of the People of God.”

Here now blockquoted is the original German and English translation (translated by hand by a fully bilingual German reader – NOT an algorithmic translation) of the opening section of this paper, found on pages 165-167:

 

Der Primat des Papstes und die Einheit des Gottesvolkes

The Primacy of the Pope and the unity of the People of God.

  1. I. Der spirituelle Grund von Primat und Kollegialität
    (The spiritual basis of primacy and collegiality)

Das Thema Papsttum gehört nicht zu den populären Themen der Nachkonzilzeit. Es hatte ein gewisses Maß an Selbstverständlichkeit, solange ihm in politischen Raum die Monarchie entsprach. In dem Augenblick, in dem der monarchische Gedanke praktisch erloschen und durch die demokratische Idee abgelöst ist, fehlt der Primatslehre das Bezugsfeld in unseren allgemeinen Denkvoraussetzungen. So ist es gewiß kein Zufall, daß das Erste Vatikanum von der Primatsidee, das Zweite aber von dem Ringen um den Begriff der Kollegialität beherrscht wurde.

The topic of the papacy is not one of the popular themes of the post-conciliar era. It had a certain measure of implicitness as long as it corresponded to the monarchy in political space. At the present moment, when the idea of monarchy has practically died out and been replaced by the democratic idea, the doctrine of primacy lacks the frame of reference in our general presuppositions. So it is certainly no coincidence that the First Vatican Council was dominated by the primacy idea, but the Second by the struggle for the concept of collegiality.

Dem ist freilich sofort hinzuzufügen, daß das Zweite Vatikanum die Kollegialitätsidee, mit der es Impulse aus dem Lebensgefühl der Gegenwart aufnahm, so zu umschreiben suchte, daß darin der Primatsgedanke enthalten ist. Heute, da wir ein wenig Erfahrung mit der Kollegialität, mit ihrem Wert und auch mit ihren Grenzen gewonnen haben, müssen wir wohl gerade an dieser Stelle wieder ansetzen, um die Zusammengehörigkeit scheinbar gegenläufiger Traditionen besser zu begreifen und so den Reichtum der christlichen Gestalt zu wahren.

It should, however, be immediately added that Vatican II sought to rewrite the idea of collegiality, with which it received incentives from today’s attitude to life, in such a way that it contained the idea of primacy. Today, as we have gained a little experience of collegiality, of its value, and also of its limits, we need to start again at this point in order to better understand the unity of seemingly contradictory traditions, thus preserving the richness of the Christian expression.

1. Kollegialität als Ausdruck der Wir-Struktur des Glaubens

Collegiality as an expression of the we-structure of the faith

In Zusammenhang mit der konziliaren Debatte hatte seinerzeit die Theologie versucht, Kollegialität über das bloß Strukturelle und Funktionale hinaus als Ausdruck eines bis in die innersten Wesensgründe des Christlichen zurückreichenden Grundgesetzes zu erfassen, das sich daher in je verschiedener Weise auf den einzelnen Ebenen der praktischen Verwirklichung des Christlichen darstellt: Es ließ sich zeigen, daß die Wir-Struktur zum Christlichen überhaupt gehört. Der Glaubende steht als solcher nie allein: Gläubigwerden heißt, aus der Isolation heraustreten in das Wir der Kinder Gottes; der Akt der Zuwendung zu dem in Christus offenbaren Gott ist immer auch Zuwendung zu den schon Gerufenen.

In connection with the conciliar debate, theology had tried at that time to grasp collegiality beyond the merely structural and functional, as the expression of a fundamental law reaching back into the innermost essence of the Christian, which therefore presents itself in different ways on the individual levels of the practical realization of the Christian: It could be shown that the we-structure belongs to the Christian in general. The believer, as such, never stands alone: Believing means stepping out of isolation into the We of the children of God; the act of devotion to the God revealed in Christ is always also devotion to those already called.

Der theo-logische Akt ist als solcher immer ein ekklesialer Akt, dem auch eine soziale Struktur eignet. Die Initiation ins Christliche ist daher konkret immer auch Sozialisation in die Gemeinde der Gläubigen hinein, ist Wir-Werdung, die das bloße Ich überschreitet.

As such, the theo-logical act is always an ecclesial act that also lends itself to a social structure. The initiation into the Christian is therefore always concrete socialization in the community of believers, is We-Formation, which is beyond the mere self.

Dem entsprach dann, daß die Jünger-Berufung Jesu sich in der Figur der Zwölf darstellt, die die Chiffre des alten Gottes-Volk-Gedankens aufnimmt, dem ja auch wiederum wesentlich ist, daß Gott eine gemeinsame Geschichte schafft und an seinem Volk als Volk handelt.

This corresponded to the fact that the disciples’ calling by Jesus is represented in the figure of the Twelve, which takes up the cipher of the old conception of God’s people, to whom it is once again essential that God creates a common history and acts on his people as a people.

Nach der anderen Seite zu zeigte sich als der tiefste Grund für diesen Wir-Charakter des Christlichen, daß Gott selbst ein Wir ist: Der Gott, den das christliche Credo bekennt, ist nicht einsames Selbst-denken des Gedankens, ist nicht absolutes und unteilbar in sich geschlossenes Ich, sondern ist Einheit in der trinitarischen Relation des Ich-Du-Wir, so daß das Wir-Sein als die göttliche Grundgestalt allem weltlichen Wir vorangeht und Gottebenbildlichkeit sich von vornherein auf solches Wir-Sein verwiesen findet.

On the other hand, as the deepest reason for this we-character of the Christian, it has become apparent that God Himself is a We: The God, whom the Christian Credo professes, is not solitary self-thinking of thought, is not absolute and indivisible in a self-contained ego, but is unity in the Trinitarian relation of the I-Thou-We, so that We-Being, as the divine basic form, precedes all worldly We’s, and the likeness of God finds itself referenced from the outset to such a We-being.

In diesem Zusammenhang rückte damals ein zuvor weithin vergessener Traktat von E. Peterson über “Monotheismus als politisches Problem” neu in Bewußtsein, in dem Peterson zu zeigen versucht hatte, daß der Arianismus deshalb politische, von den Kaisern begünstigte Theologie war, weil er zur politischem Monarchie die göttliche Entsprechung gewährleistete, während das Obsiegen des trinitarischen Glaubens die politische Theologie zersprengte und Theologie als Rechtfertigung von politischer Monarchie aufhob.

In this context, a previously largely forgotten treatise by E. Peterson on “Monotheism as a Political Problem,” again attracted attention, in which Peterson had attempted to show that Arianism was a political theology favored by the emperors, because it provided the divine equivalent of the political monarchy, whereas the triumph of the Trinitarian faith shattered political theology and overturned theology as a justification for political monarchy.

Peterson hatte seine Darlegung an dieser Stelle abgebrochen; jetzt wurde sie aufgenommen und zu einem neuen Entsprechungsdenken weitergeführt, dessen Grundansatz lautete: Dem Wir Gottes muß kirchliches Handeln im Modell des Wir entsprechen. Dieser allgemeine, vielfältig ausdeutbare Ansatz wurde vereinzelt bis zu der Aussage vorangetrieben, demgemäß folge die Ausübung des Primats durch einen einzigen Menschen, den Papst in Rom, eigentlich einem arianischen Modell.

Peterson had broken off his analysis at this point; now it was taken up and continued into a new analogical thought, the basic idea being that the We of God must correspond to ecclesiastical agency according to the We model. This general, multi-faceted approach has occasionally been advanced to the point that according to it, the exercise of primacy by a single man, the pope in Rome, actually follows an Arian model.

Entsprechend der Dreipersönlichkeit Gottes müsse auch die Kirche durch ein Dreierkollegium geleitet werden, dessen drei Inhaber zusammen der Papst seien. Dabei fehlte es nicht an findigen Spekulationen, die (etwas unter Anlehnung an Solowjews Geschichte vom Antichrist) herausfanden, daß auf diese Weise ein römischer Katholik, ein Orthodoxer und ein Christ aus dem Bereich der reformatorischen Bekenntnisse zusammen die Papst-Troika bilden könnten.

According to the triune nature of God, the church must be led by a triumvirate, whose three occupants together are the pope. It was not lacking in resourceful speculation, which (somewhat following Solovyov’s story of the Antichrist) found that, in this way, a Roman Catholic, an Orthodox and a Christian from the Reformation confessions together could form the Pope-Troika.

Damit schien, unmittelbar aus der Theo-logie, dem Gottesbegriff, die Schlußformel der Ökumene gefunden, die Quadratur des Kreises geleistet, durch die das Papsttum, Hauptärgernis der nicht-katholischen Christenheit, zum definitiven Vehikel für die Einheit aller Christen werdem müßte.*SEE FOOTNOTE

Thus, directly from theology, the concept of God, the complimentary close of ecumenism, seemed to have squared the circle, through which the papacy, the chief annoyance of non-Catholic Christendom, must become the definitive vehicle for the unity of all Christians.

*FOOTNOTE (*(Derlei war gelegentlich in mündlichen Äußerunger zu hören, die sich vergröbernd auf Ausführungen von H. Mühlen beziehen mochten, bes. in dessen Werk Entsakralisierung, Paderborn 1971, 228 ff.; 240 ff.; 376-396; 401-440.Obwohl Mühlens eigene Darlegungen beeindrückend und weiterführend sind, scheinen sie mir von der Gefahr eines neuen Entsprechungsdenkens nicht frei, das die ekklesiologische Anwendbarkeit der trinitarischen Aussage überdehnt.)

*FOOTNOTE (This was occasionally heard in oral remarks, which sought to refer in an unrefined manner to H. Mühlen’s work, especially in his work Entsakralisierung, Paderborn 1971, 228 ff.; 240 ff.; 376-396; 401-440.Although Mühlen’s own expositions are impressive and advanced, they do not seem to me to be free from the danger of a new analogical thought which overstretches the ecclesiological applicability of the trinitarian statement.)

———————————————————-

So, he we have proof of Joseph Ratzinger, like his German and Nouvelle Theologie colleagues and peers of the day, positing RADICALLY SUBSTANTIALLY ERRONEOUS IDEAS about the Petrine Office, casually referring to it as an “annoyance”, and echoing Kasper’s words that the papacy suffered a “crisis of legitimation”.  The driving point was that the papacy MUST be “radically and fundamentally transformed” by some sort of expansion into a “collegial, synodal office”.  He we see Joseph Ratzinger taking this SUBSTANTIALLY ERRONEOUS MADNESS so far as the say that the Petrine Ministry could eventually include NON-CATHOLICS and thus become the “definitive vehicle for the unity of all Christians.”  But first, it has to be “expanded” into a “collegial, synodal ministry”.

Joseph Ratzinger accepted the Papacy in April 2005 AS IT IS, EVER WAS, AND DESPITE HIS WARPED SUBSTANTIAL ERRORS OF WHAT IT MIGHT “BECOME”.

THIS is what Canon 188 was written to protect against.  THIS is why the “substantial error” clause is there.  So that when this MADNESS was attempted or even approached, that it would FAIL SPECTACULARLY.  Why?  Because the CHURCH IS INDEFECTIBLE.  Because the Petrine Office is SUPERNATURALLY PROTECTED.  Because the very act of attempting to execute such madness would nullify the attempt in and of itself, and the situation would just keep reverting to the status quo – the Papacy as established by Christ.

There is absolutely NOTHING that Pope Benedict XVI or anyone else can ever, ever do to successfully effectuate this abject madness described by Ratzinger above or anything remotely related to it, because Canon Law itself is standing like a monolith protecting Holy Mother Church and the Petrine Office from this.  They can drive headlong into that monolith as hard as they like, but they will never, ever so much as leave a SCRATCH on Holy Mother Church, Indefectible, nor can they EVER “fundamentally transform” the Petrine Office, Divinely Instrituted by Jesus Christ Himself, and thus IMMUTABLE.

Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger is the one and only living Pope, whether he likes it or not.  The illegitimacy of his attempted “transformation and expansion” of the Papacy in February ARSH 2013 was completely and totally null, and he remains, per Canon 188, the one and only living Pope.

This madness MUST end here, and be resisted with every fiber of our being.  Every journalist, blogger, priest and bishop of good will should be bombarded with communiques every day from every mere pew sitter, to DEMAND that the illegitimacy and SUBSTANTIAL ERROR of Pope Benedict’s attempted action in February 2013 be fully exposed and acknowledged, and that Antipope Bergoglio be immediately removed, the Bergoglian Antipapacy totally nullified, and Bergoglio be repatriated to Argentina, hopefully to face civil charges for financial, political and child abuse-enabling crimes.

Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger should be given either the option to repent and resume his exercise of the Petrine Office, OR be asked to live out his earthly life in prayer and seclusion, with an emergency “state of suspense” regency established to pay the electricity bills and other bare necessities of the Vatican City State.  While Popes CAN validly resign, at this point I think that there would be too much suspicion and uncertainty surrounding a resignation now submitted by Pope Benedict, that the path forward IN PRUDENCE is CLEARLY that NO CONCLAVE should be called until Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger has died, in God’s good time.  That just seems like common sense to me.  Let there be NO AMBIGUITY NOR CONFUSION.

There will certainly be more to be said about this.

I hope this helps.

St. Vincent Ferrer, pray for us.
St. Catherine of Siena, pray for us.
St. Athanasius, pray for us.
St. Peter, pray for us.
Holy Family, pray for us.

Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on us.

Our Advocate in Exposing the Bergoglian Antipapacy: St. Vincent Ferrer – the Saint Who Backed an Antipope (for a time)

Thanks to one and all for the kind words and encouragement as we make strides in this effort to expose the Bergoglian Antipapacy and defend Holy Mother Church, the Divinely Instituted Petrine Office, the one and only Living Pope, Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger, and to hopefully keep others in the Church Militant from falling into despair, sedevacantism or even being misled or browbeaten into embracing the Antichurch and its wretched mascot, Antipope Jorge Bergoglio.

I want to encourage one and all to enjoin a saint in this battle who, I think, is probably more solicitous to this cause than perhaps any other – St. Vincent Ferrer. I often pair St. Vincent Ferrer with St. Catherine of Siena because they were contemporaries who were backing two different men as Pope for a time. As it turned out, St. Catherine was right and St. Vincent was wrong, and it is precisely because St. Vincent was wrong that we should seek his intercession.

The confusion about the identity of the true pope in St. Vincent’s day was a political question. St. Vincent never backed a raging heretic, nor would he have. Let that be said and well understood. However, St. Vincent was lied to and misled, and thus, for a time, called an antipope “Pope” and commemorated an Antipope at the Te Igitur every day as he celebrated Mass. St. Vincent was such a holy man that he continued to perform spectacular miracles even while he was mistakenly commemorating an Antipope.

When the truth was fully exposed, and the controversy surrounding the identity of the Pope resolved, St. Vincent corrected his error immediately. But, can you imagine how St. Vincent felt knowing that he had commemorated an antipope hundreds of times in the Mass? Even though St. Vincent’s mistake was a completely honest one, and others had deceived him, being such a holy man, he must have felt awful. No one sane is ever happy to have made a mistake, even an honest one.

Given this, can you imagine how solicitous St. Vincent is for ALL OF US in these days? Can you imagine how keenly he wants to intercede for the correction of the people who are wrong, and how much he wants to intercede in assistance to and support of those who are right? And because St. Vincent has the Beatific Vision, he has all information and knows EXACTLY what the truth is.

Please join me in asking for St. Vincent Ferrer’s intercession as we fight for Holy Mother Church, the Petrine Office, the Pope, and for our fellow man.

St. Vincent Ferrer, Giovanni Bellini, ARSH 1465, Church of Sts. John and Paul, Venice

Don’t forget the Matthew 17:20 Initiative as well: full fasting twice per week and daily prayer that:

-the Bergoglian Antipapacy be publicly acknowledged, that Antipope Bergoglio be removed and the entire Antipapacy be publicly nullified.

-Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger be publicly acknowledged as having been the one and only living Pope since April ARSH 2005.

-Jorge Bergoglio repent, revert to Catholicism, eventually die in a state of grace and someday achieve the Beatific Vision.

-Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger repent, eventually die in a state of grace and someday achieve the Beatific Vision.

St. Vincent Ferrer, pray for us!

Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on us!

So… What is it going to take, exactly?

Yep. The OFFICIAL logo of Antipope Bergoglio’s upcoming pollution of Morocco is a warped Cross INSIDE the crescent moon. And they openly, proudly acknowledge this. No conspiracy THEORIES here, folks. Just Conspiracy Facts.

“Antipope Bergoglio, Vicar of Soros, Servant of Satan.”

Pray for Pope Benedict XVI, and if I may ask, for efforts and initiatives coming to fruition on this end. “Act, and God will act.” No truer words, folks. No truer words. The Tiny Toe…doth wiggle. To-and-fro, to-and-fro….

We Are All the More Blameworthy, Because So Little Would Be Needed On Our Part…

“To recoil before an enemy, or to keep silence when from all sides such clamors are raised against truth, is the part of a man either devoid of character or who entertains doubt as to the truth of what he professes to believe.

In both cases such mode of behaving is base and is insulting to God, and both are incompatible with the salvation of mankind.

This kind of conduct is profitable only to the enemies of the faith, for nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good.

Moreover, want of vigor on the part of Christians is so much the more blameworthy, as not seldom little would be needed on their part to bring to naught false charges and refute erroneous opinions, and by always exerting themselves more strenuously they might reckon upon being successful.

After all, no one can be prevented from putting forth that strength of soul which is the characteristic of true Christians, and very frequently by such display of courage our enemies lose heart and their designs are thwarted.

Christians are, moreover, born for combat, whereof the greater the vehemence, the more assured, God aiding, the triumph: “Have confidence; I have overcome the world.”

Nor is there any ground for alleging that Jesus Christ, the Guardian and Champion of the Church, needs not in any manner the help of men. Power certainly is not wanting to Him, but in His loving kindness He would assign to us a share in obtaining and applying the fruits of salvation procured through His grace.

SAPIENTIAE CHRISTIANAE
Pope Leo XIII
Paragraph 14

Folks, anyone who tells your that we should not proactively fight the evil in the Church and the world because it would be “too human” and thus deprive God of a chance to intervene supernaturally is basically preaching Calvinistic double predestination heresy, and should be ignored.

God delays in intervening supernaturally precisely so that we may STAND UP FOR HIM, so that we may, in a certain sense, “come to His aid”, thus giving us the chance to be truly happy in this world – the true happiness that comes only from doing the right thing.

He’s waiting.  He has been waiting for all of our lives.  How much longer He will wait, none of us knows.  But at some point, the chance will pass, and when it is gone, it will be gone forever.

Big God, Tiny Toes

Happy Feast of the Epiphany!

This is one of my favorite paintings, and today is the feast of its depiction: the Epiphany, or Adoration of the Magi.  This painting makes me smile every time I see it.  I love the depiction of Our Lady because she is so very beautiful. (Sometimes the Blessed Virgin in paintings is depicted as… maybe not what I would consider jaw-droppingly gorgeous – but in this painting she is.) But the Star of this Show is the Baby Jesus – and His Big Toe.

Adoration of the Magi, Ottavio Vannini, early 1600s, Florence

When I look at this image, it seems not like a painting to me, but like a .GIF.  What do I mean by that?  I can see the movement of Our Lord’s toe as He is wiggling it, and I can see the subtle smile come across Our Lady’s face as she looks down at the scene of the very serious and lofty king leaning in to kiss the tiny toe of the Creator of the Universe and King of Kings, and He is PLAYFULLY wiggling it and making cooing baby sounds as the Magi puckers up and leans in to “get that Toe!” as so many of us have done exactly with other babies.

We have been discussing over the past few days the infinite HUGENESS of God, using galaxies and galactic clusters as metaphors for His infinite bigness and our infantesimal smallness.  I am reminded of something Our Lord said to St. Catherine of Siena, to whom, let us not forget, He was MYSTICALLY ESPOUSED.  Listen to His words to His beloved Catherine:

“Do you know, daughter, who you are, And who I AM? If you know these two things, you will be blessed. You are she who is not; whereas I AM HE WHO IS. Have this knowledge in you and the enemy will never deceive you….

God Almighty can say to His beloved, “you are she who is not” because it is true relative to Him, and because ALL EXISTENCE, REALITY AND TRUTH is through Him, with Him and in Him.

And that brings us back to the Tiny Wiggling Toe. It is precisely through these infinite juxtapositions that we draw closer to God in our contemplation of Him.  The selfsame God that created and sustains the galaxies, galactic clusters and the entire universe is also the cooing Baby wiggling His Big Toe at the Magi crawling on the ground to kiss It.  Without the Majesty of the Bigness, you can’t appreciate the Humility of the Smallness, and without the Condescension of the Smallness, you can’t appreciate the incomprehensible Love of the Bigness.

This is the same idea with the two species of Fear of the Lord – without the servile fear of the Lord as Our Judge, you can’t fully appreciate the filial fear that He established Himself with the words, “I no longer call you slaves, but friends….” The paradigm shifted with the Incarnation and proclamation of the Gospel from not sinning primarily for fear of punishment, to not sinning because He loves us so much that to disappoint or hurt Him in any way is (should be) revolting to us.

And likewise, without the filial fear of breaking Our Lord’s Heart, one can very easily cast aside the fact that He is, in fact, the Fearsome and Terrible Judge and He can turn into the horrific cartoon character “Jesus my Boyfriend”, or even worse, “Jesus my pet Golden Retriever”. People with no healthy servile fear of the Lord are called “cheap grace” Protestants, or just universal salvationists.

So what exactly is the Good News?  Is it that God is NOT the Just and Terrible Judge of Mankind who will sort the sheep from the goats, and sift men like wheat from chaff, burning the chaff?  No.  The Good News, the GOSPEL is that the Just and Terrible Judge is also the Baby wiggling His Tiny Toe as the Three Kings crawl forth to kiss It.  The Gospel is that the Just and Terrible Judge ALSO loves you infinitely, and is thus 100% on your side.  Do you understand that?  THE JUDGE IS ON YOUR SIDE TO AN EXTENT THAT YOU SIMPLY CANNOT COMPREHEND.

All you have to do is say “yes” to Him.  All you have to do is say and believe, “Jesus, I know that You love me”, and then ACTUALLY ACT LIKE YOU BELIEVE IT.  Keep His commandments.  Don’t break His heart.  Enter His One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Avail yourself of the Sacraments He established for YOU and YOUR SALVATION, most especially the Sacrament of Confession and the Sacrament of the Altar, which is His very Physical Substance.

Look at the Tiny Wiggling Toe.  Then go look up at the stars and galaxies and galactic clusters that He made and sustains without effort.  Put the two together and know that you are he who is not, and the Tiny Toe is HE WHO IS.

I hope this helps.

“I’m gonna get it! I’m gonna get that TOE!”

Betcha can’t say it without laughing…!

I saw this comment somewhere a while back and thought it worth sharing:

Fr. Linus Clovis has said that the Church and the anti-church CURRENTLY exist, occupying the same sacramental, liturgical, and juridical space.

Does anyone doubt this? Of course not.

Now, say the following without laughing out loud: “Jorge Bergoglio is the head of the Church, opposing the anti-church.”

What is WORSE than being a Freemason?

There is yet another book out about the odious priest Annibale Bugnini, who was essentially the father/architect of the Novus Ordo Mass.

A quote is recounted in the book:

[Alcuin]Reid includes a bit he learned from the late, great Card. Stickler about whether or not Bugnini really was a Freemason, often alleged about him.

No,” the Cardinal replied, “it was something far worse.”

What could be worse than being a Freemason?

Look at the picture of Bugnini below, and you tell me.

Nah. No red flags there.

Then realize that the vast, vast majority of the priests, bishops and Cardinals today are pinched-lipped faggots that make Bugnini look like Pa Ingalls by comparison.

And further remember that there are two types of faggots: those who have molested boys or lads, and those who haven’t managed it yet, but are working on it.

Methodist on the Brink of Entering the One True Church Weighs In: Going To Mass and Doing What You Are Supposed To Do IS Evangelization

Ann,

SuperNerd’s comment about how to evangelize really spoke to me and I’ve been meaning to write you about something. I am a TLM attending protestant, technically Methodist, who has been thinking of converting. Actually, I’ve already made my decision, but my spouse is vigorously opposed, so if you can pray for us that might help! (We and Tiny Princess are on it! -AB)

I’m not in the Church at present. I’ve followed you since the Rush Limbaugh on air reading (BTW, I have a suspicion Rush is still following you, too).

I was attending Mass over Christmas and one of the things that is always on my mind was bothering me on this particular night, as well. How in the world am I going to raise my family, if I can ever get them in the Church, in the Traditional Latin Mass? It took me months to figure out what was going on with the Missal, etc. Now I’m pretty comfortable, but I’ve been going to Mass alone so I’ve not had to explain this to my kids (6,4, and 2) and I simply could not imagine how “hard” it’s going to be to raise them in the TLM. We’re used to the ease of protestant church. My spouse thinks I’m nuts. 

So, I’m sitting there at Mass and a family comes in. They have enough kids to take up two pews, so they deal with way more hassle than I do with three kids. In one of the pews are their teenage kids who end up sitting behind me. For the entire Mass this 15-16 year old girl sits behind me and sings every prayer, every response, every thing she is supposed to during the entire Mass (in Latin!). She is not a trained singer, but she hits the notes with the choir perfectly and I could not help but think an angel was sitting behind me, helping me along. She has NO IDEA of the evangelization/ministry/answering of prayer she is doing in that moment. None. She is simply “doing what she is supposed to be doing.” I wept. I figure if this kid can sing all the prayers, my kids can, too. When we were walking out of the Church I leaned over and said, “Thank you for your good singing.” This girl was so happy you’d think I was giving her a Grammy award. She literally beamed.

Doing what you are supposed to do” is ministry. It is evangelization. Everyone thinks they are supposed to be “famous” as in the next Scott Hahn or something.

Seriously, just go to Mass, live a holy life, and you will be sharing your faith.

SuperNerd’s witness is incredible. Yours is too. You guys aren’t “famous” in the earthly sense, but you are doing more good than you realize, but even sitting in your pew and singing is “doing something.”

Yours in Christ,

X

Monolith, Magnificat and Laniakea

A couple of weeks ago I wrote a piece about the true definition of “schism“, and used the imagery of a monolith as wide as the Milky Way Galaxy, and twice as tall, with each individual human being likened to a single atom. This grossly inadequate metaphor helps to at least give us some way to begin to think about something which we can never fully comprehend: the infinite Triune Godhead.

I came across a video which, given our “monolith” metaphor really struck me, and I hope strikes you too, especially if you feel yourself begin to be dragged down into the hopelessness, defeatism and despair being peddled as virtuousness and “sanity” these days.

Watch the video below about the so-called “Laniakea” galactic supercluster, and then tell me again how a bunch of sodomites, Freemasons and morons are just too much of a match for God, and how there is “nothing we can do”, even though God is on our side. Then, remember well the Canticle of the Blessed Virgin, who carried in her womb the selfsame God that made and sustains the Laniakea galactic supercluster, but who so loves us that He allows us to participate and cooperate in His plans, because that is the only way we can ever be truly happy.

My soul doth magnify the Lord,

And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour

Because He hath regarded the humility of His handmaid: for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

Because He that is mighty hath done great things to me, and holy is His name.

And His mercy is from generation unto generations to them that fear Him.

He hath shewed might in His arm: He hath scattered the proud in the conceit of their heart.

He hath put down the mighty from their seat, and hath exalted the humble.

He hath filled the hungry with good things, and the rich He hath sent empty away.

He hath received Israel His servant, being mindful of His mercy.

As He spoke to our fathers; to Abraham and his seed forever.

Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost,

As it was in the beginning is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.

Quotes from Vatican I and Pius X “Lamentabili”, “Pascendi”, and “Ex quo” on the Non-Bifurcatable and Immutable Papacy

(I’m on the road to consult with high-level people with expertise in these matters. I am blockquoting in full this excellent contribution from “Smith” over at the NonVeniPacem blog. Spread the word! -AB)

Here is some authoritative confirmation of the Non-Bifurcatable papacy.

Vatican I, Sess. IV, Ch. I (Denzinger 1822)

St. Pius X, Lamentabili (Denzinger 2053)

St. Pius X, Pascendi (Denzinger 2091)

St. Pius X, Apostolic Letter “Ex Quo” (Denzinger 2147a)

There are numerous other quotes that would help to show that the Church was indisputably founded *by Jesus Christ Himself* as a monarchy. These quotes use the word ‘monarch’ in reference to the pope. The very word ‘monarch’ means ‘lone ruler’, for its Greek antecedents are ‘monos’ (alone) and ‘archein’ (to rule). I restrict myself to these four quotes only, simply because they make clearer reference to the fact.

Dz 1822:

“So we teach and declare that, according to the testimonies of the Gospel, the primacy of *jurisdiction* [nothing about prayer here, folks] over the entire Church of God was promised and was conferred immediately and directly upon the blessed Apostle Peter by *Christ the Lord*. For the *one* Simon [Unum enim Simonem], to whom he had before said: “Thou shalt be called Cephas, after he had given forth his confession with the words: “Thou art Christ, the Son of the Living God, the Lord spoke with these solemn words: “Blessed art thou [etc.]”… And upon the one Simon Peter [uni Simoni Petro], Jesus after His resurrection conferred the *jurisdiction* [nothing about prayer here, folks] of the highest pastor [= shepherd/guide] and rector [= ruler] over His entire fold… To this teaching of the Sacred Scriptures, *so manifest as it has always been understood by the Catholic Church*, *are opposed openly the vicious opinions of those who perversely DENY THAT THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT IN HIS CHURCH WAS ESTABLISHED BY CHRIST THE LORD; that to Peter *alone* [solum Petrum], before the other apostles, *whether individually or all together*, was confided the true and proper primacy *of jurisdiction* [nothing about prayer here, folks] by Christ; or of those who affirm that the same primacy was not immediately and directly bestowed upon the blessed Peter himself, *but upon the Church*, and through this Church upon him as the *minister* of the Church Herself.”

Important: The word ‘one’ in the above passage is to be understood in the sense of the official Latin (as always), which uses the *cardinal* number ´unus,a,um’. That number ‘one’ does not mean ‘first’. Nor does it mean ‘one’ as in ‘someone’; it means the numerically one, single (person) Simon. I’ve taught Latin for over 15 years, but you should not trust me on this. It will be a matter of minutes to look it up in a basic Latin grammar. You don’t even need to know any Latin to verify this.

The word ‘alone’ in “to Peter alone”, is in the Latin the adjective ‘solus,a,um’. The words ‘alone’ and ‘solus’ are exact synonyms.

Otherwise, the English translation given above of Dz1822 is quite literal, and speaks for itself. Anyone who does not see that Vatican I here condemns the idea of a bifurcated papacy is wilfully blind, or incapable of understanding plain language, or, worse yet…a Modernist whose intellect, even if perfectly functional, is corrupted by false philosophy…like…mmm…Ratzinger’s intellect is corrupted.

Next up:

Dz 2053 (Syllabus of Errors, or Lamentabili, of St. Pius X):

*Condemned* proposition: “The organic constitution of the Church is not immutable, but Christian society, just as human society, is subject to perpetual evolution.”

Then:

Dz 2091 (Pascendi, St. Pius X): It is a little long to quote, but in sum it condemns as a Modernist error that authority emanates from the Church itself, as a *collectivity* of consciences. It affirms that the authoritative structure of the Church is autocratic, and was given as such by an external mandate of God.

And:

Dz 2147a: “…[It is] an error, long since condemned by Our predecessor, Innocent X…[cf. Dz 1091 — quite interesting], in which it is argued that St. Paul is held as a brother entirely equal to St. Peter…[also an error] that the Catholic Church was not in the earliest days a sovereignty of *one person*, that is, a monarchy…”

Now it occurs to me that all the above is a sort of dialogue with a lunatic.

Up until the supposed bifurcation of BXVI, the *very idea* that anyone should *need* to prove to the public at large that the papacy is

1) A *jurisdictional*, non-sacramental, revocable office, with NO “spiritual essence”; no integral component, or munus, of “prayer and suffering”.

2) A monarchy; an office that only one man can hold.

3) That this one man holds the entirety of the office, and cannot share any part of it with anyone.

…the very idea, I say, of a *need* to prove to the public at large that the papacy is such as the Church has always understood it…would have been considered bat**** crazy.

But here we all are, engaging in an exercise that actually dignifies this insanity with serious consideration — all because of the colossally arrogant posturing of kooks like Rahner, Ratzinger, Neumann (and don’t forget Walter Kasper!) and all the other Mad Modernist Muckrakers, who think they know better than the Church’s +two thousand years of experience, better than all previous popes, better even than Jesus Christ.

May God do with them as He sees fit…but do it quickly.